St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-09-15


and as the market value was 50 cents,
the land cost the purchaser only one
half. The company also related 81 per
acre Oh all lands broken within the first
two years. These rates Mai. POStle-
thwalte explained, were only made to
those who went out to view the lands.
If the prospective settler took his fam
lily out, another special rate was made.
1t was claimed no discrimination was
made, as this rate was made to all actual
settlers.
No appearance was made from the
complainant and the commission took a
recess until 3 o'clock.
JOBBERs' REMONsTRANCE.
What They Have to Say Regard
ing Carload Rates.
The commission listened in the after
noon to the circumstances of the Job
berS and manufacturers against the
petitions against the abolition of car
load rates. The meeting was held at
the real estate exchange in the West
was hurled forcibly at the heads of the
commissioners. The jobberS presented
their side of the case with an air of de-
termination which indicated that they
considered the situation serious one
The afternoon was taken upin the read
ing of rem0nStranceS, which, in most
instances. were quite lengthy, and in
literary way were quite creditable, and
argumentatively strong. The railroad
commissioners of Iowa added their in
fluence and without doubt strong i'm
preston was made.
In the communication prepared by the
committee appointed at Tuesdays meet
ing of the jODberS the arguments gener-
ally used are succinctly stated and a
good idea of the tenor of she remarks
can be gained from its perusal.
In calling the meeting to order Judge
Cooley stated that he feared some mis-
apprehension existed that Minneapolis
had been designed as the place where
the complaints of jobbers were to be
formally heard. This was not so. The
commission had two cases involving the
same points in which the jobbers were
interested, and while willing and glad
to obtain any information desired it un-
derstood that this was not to be formal
he lring.
In calling the meeting to order Judge
Cooley stated that apparently some mis-
apprehension existed that this place,
Minneapolis, had been assigned. We
have two cases involving the same points
i'll which you are interested. While we
do not wish this to be understood as a
formal meeting we would be pleased to
hear any arguments.
William B. Dean, of st. Paul, the
president of the meeting of the jObberS,
prefaced the reading of the remOn-
STRANGE by stating that the position of
the jObberS was an anOlamuS one. 1.-The
complaints against the railroads." he
said, $50 invalue and imperil our inter
estS that we desire to appear and answer
these complaints, although the railroads
have not asked us to do So" He then
read
THE REMONSTRANCE.
We, the authorized representatives of the
commercial and transportation organizations
and of the business men of the West and
Northwest, embracing the states Of Mime
sofa, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, and part of
missouri, Michigan and Pennsylvania and the
territory of Dakota, respectfully beg leave to
submit that the petition against the retention
of car load rates presented from the city of
New York is unsound in its premises and
fallaciOus i'll its arguments.
The proposition of this petition to which
we desire first to invite attention is the state
ment that the more general adoption of car
load rates by the trunk line roads since the
passage OF the 1nterS tate commerce law is
unjuStitable and detrimental to the interests
of the country. 1t errs in asserting that prior
to the enactment of the law such rates were
made upon few articles. Yet we admit that
the practice is more general since than be-
fore, but it is not detrimental Prior to the
passage of that law the railroad companies
recognized the right and public benefit of
lower rates for larger than smaller quantities
quite as generally as now, but granted it as q
secret rebate to large shippers, thus introduce
ing into our commerce uncertainty as to
rates, particularly among shippers doing
equal business, confusion and wrong. The
adoption OF carload rates in place of this
practice has removed this most vicious evil
and placed shippers demanding equal
service upon equal terms, greatly to
the benefit of all tnasiness. 1t errs
in asserting that prior to the adoption of car
load rates small shippers were fairly treated.
for by the rebate practice unjust discrimina-
tons were made among them and against
them, and none knowing the rates his COM
petition had, or might have, all were always
in Il state of uncertainty and confusion. The
same was equally true of larger shippers.
Carload rates reduces the cost of moving
merchandise from the large manufacturing
ana importing centers OF the East to the
distributing centers of the West below the
figures at which 1t can be done if the prop
erty be moved under the conditions and
circumstances attending the movement of
property i'll less than carloads; hence, the
country is so far benefited, and not injured.
The distributing centerS of the West are not
so small as to have but one wholesale estab-
lishment, as represented, but contain many
such houses, which are large and strong,
and which purchase their merchandise
direct from manufactures, and import
ers. saving the seaboard jobbers' profit
to consumers and producers instead of add
ing an additional middleman's profit, as as
serted, and thus the country is benefited in
stead of being injured. The merchandise on
which car load rates are now made is the
cheap, bulky necesSaries of life, which will
not bear high rates of transportation, and
which would be restricted in distribution if
car load rates be abolished and less than car
load rates be charged, and SO the producers
and consumers would be injured instead of
benefited.
The second proposition to which we invite
attention is that carload rates reduce the
revenues of railways. AS above stated. rail-
prior to the passage of the interstate COM
merce law by secret rebates, and hence were
accepting voluntarily the same, or greater re-
duction of revenue before than now; hence
railroads are not injured by it. but the evil is
removed.
The provisions of the interstate commerce
Jaw which prohibited the practice of grant
ing rebates do not require the railroads to
make carload rates, yet they have made
them. which must be accepted as an admis-
sion by them that they can afford it. Mani
testify, If all railroad business must be done
under the conditions attending the shipment
OF property In less than carload quantities.
railways cannot afford to do it at carload
rates. Hence, the expense of transportation
must be increased without benefit to the rail
roads. and the people must pay the addi-
uonal cost without compensatfng gain.
1t may be true, as asserted, that no arbi-
trary STANDARD has been or can be devised by
which the proper and just distinction can be
made between large and small shipments.
but prior to the general adoption of carloads
no attempt was made to devise such "a stand
pay whatever their situation enabled the
companies to exact from them